Skip to content
Back to judgment

Citation network

Patton Vs. United States

Cites for this judgment

  • US Supreme Court
  • Apr 14, 1930

Citation network · 7-day free trial

Brief every cited case in minutes

Open an 18-section AI Brief on any citation below, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial - no card required.

  • 18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
  • Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
  • Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
  • Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

No card required · credentials emailed · Log in if you already have an account

61 entries 3 linked 58 unlinked
Show
  1. Springville Vs. Thomas US Supreme Court · Apr 26, 1897
  2. Maxwell Vs. Dow US Supreme Court · Feb 26, 1900
  3. Kearney Vs. Case US Supreme Court · Jan 01, 1870
  4. Patton v. United
    Search
  5. States - 281 U.S. 276 (1930) U.S. Supreme Court Patton v. United
    Search
  6. States, 281 U.S. 276 (1930) Patton v. United
    Search
  7. and (3) that the verdict should be unanimous. As to the first of these requisites, it is enough to cite Thompson v. Utah
    Search
  8. The second requisite was expressly dealt with in Capital Traction Company v. Hof
    Search
  9. The third requisite was held essential in American Publishing Company v. Fisher
    Search
  10. the legislative department to destroy or abridge. What was said by Mr. Justice Brewer in American Publishing Company v. Fisher
    Search
  11. doubting the validity of a waiver of a considerable number of jurors, or of a jury altogether. See, for example, State v. Kaufman
    Search
  12. Iowa 578, 580, with which compare State v. Williams
    Search
  13. Ross v. Egan
    Search
  14. Pa. 251, 256, with which compare Commonwealth v. Hall
    Search
  15. for the distinction. Other state courts, with, we think, better reason, have adopted a contrary view. In State v. Baer
    Search
  16. person to plead guilty, and thus waive any trial, he must necessarily be able to waive a jury trial. In Jennings v. State
    Search
  17. without more, be answered in the negative. Defendants strongly rely upon the language of this court in Thompson v. Utah
    Search
  18. Defendants also cite as supporting their contention two decisions of federal circuit courts of appeal, namely, Low v. United
    Search
  19. States, 169 Fed. 86, and Dickinson v. United
    Search
  20. has been characterized as involving innovation 'highly dangerous,' it would, as said by Judge Seevers in State v. Kaufman
    Search
  21. the two provisions mean substantially the same thing, and this is the effect of the holding of this court in Callan v. Wilson
    Search
  22. provisions. The power of waiver being established, this is the clear import of the decision of this court in Schick v. United
    Search
  23. Page 281 U. S. 300 See also In re Belt, 159 U. S. 95 , and Riddle v. Dyche
    Search
  24. a jury in criminal cases in the District of Columbia. The Court of Appeals of that District upheld the statute in Belt v. United
    Search
  25. in relation to that instrument, as a contemporaneous exposition of the highest authority. Capital Traction Company v. Hof
    Search
  26. it was competent for the parties to waive a trial by jury. The early cases are collected in a footnote to Kearney v. Case
    Search
  27. case in support of the proposition, and one which has influenced other decisions advancing similar views, is Cancemi v. The
    Search
  28. A decision flatly to the contrary, and one fairly representative of others to the same effect, is State v. Kaufman
    Search
  29. State v. Sackett
    Search
  30. justified by conditions which no longer exist, and, as the Supreme Court of Nevada well said in Reno Smelting Works v. Stevenson
    Search
  31. upon a substantial basis. In this respect, we fully agree with what was said by the Supreme Court of Wisconsin in Hack v. State
    Search
  32. There are decisions to that effect, and also decisions to the contrary. The conflict is marked and direct. Schick v. United
    Search
  33. In Commonwealth v. Beard
    Search
  34. by one charged with a grave crime and when asserted by one charged with a lesser one. Hence, when it is held in Schick v. United
    Search
  35. This view of the matter subsequently had the approval of the supreme court of the state in Commonwealth ex rel. Ross v. Egan
    Search
  36. Com. v. Beard
    Search
  37. Commonwealth v. Rowe
    Search
  38. State v. Ross
    Search
  39. S.D. 188, 192-193, involving a misdemeanor, but followed in State v. Tiedeman
    Search
  40. U.S. Supreme Court Patton v. United
    Search
  41. Thompson v. Utah
    Search
  42. Capital Traction Company v. Hof
    Search
  43. American Publishing Company v. Fisher
    Search
  44. State v. Kaufman
    Search
  45. State v. Williams
    Search
  46. Ross v. Egan
    Search
  47. Commonwealth v. Hall
    Search
  48. In State v. Baer
    Search
  49. In Jennings v. State
    Search
  50. Low v. United
    Search

AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial